Software Bisque

Take a virtual tour of the Software Bisque campus Watch Steve Bisque discuss the Paramount mount with S&T's Dennis Di Cicco Read the Paramount MYT Review Read about the Paramount Software Suite

Myt or MX+

rated by 0 users
This post has 18 Replies | 3 Followers

Top 100 Contributor
Posts 230
maudy2u Posted: 11-06-2017 2:05 PM

Hello,

I am considering purchasing the Myt. My current kit is an EdgeHD 11 with Moonlight focuser, OAG, Cameras and EFW. There is a finder scope, and 12v USB hub as well. Currently, this is used with a CGEM DX with two 22lbs counter weights.

The payload, when placed on a scale is about 43lbs.

Should I be looking at the Mx+ instead?

Thank you,

Stephen

Top 10 Contributor
Posts 6,112

More mount the better, having said that the MyT will handle 50 lbs of instrument equipment (100 lb. total) so your set up should not be a problem.

You'll have to decide if you're okay with being at or near the limit if you add new equipment in the future (heavier OTA, camera,  etc.).

Tom

Top 10 Contributor
Posts 27,816
Software Bisque Employee

Thank you for considering the Paramount MYT (or Paramount MX+). 

maudy2u:
The payload, when placed on a scale is about 43lbs. Should I be looking at the Mx+ instead?
Both Paramount models can comfortably carry this payload.

maudy2u:
Should I be looking at the Mx+ instead?
This can be a difficult question to answer without knowing more about your goals.

  1. Do you observe from a fixed, permanent position, portably, or remotely?
  2. Do you have plans to upgrade to heavier equipment in the near future?

Thanks again.  Hopefully other (wonderful) Paramount owners can offer additional advice.

Daniel R. Bisque

Software Bisque, Inc.

862 Brickyard Circle

Golden, Colorado 80403-8058

Office Hours: 8 a.m.-5 p.m. Monday-Friday GMT-7:00

Posting Etiquette

Top 100 Contributor
Posts 230

Okay, this is really interesting for me :)

Please bear with my long post; it is due to my excitement of perhaps finding something to plan for. I have been search the forums for a bit, and now know I should have come here with my questions...

Daniel R. Bisque:
Do you observe from a fixed, permanent position, portably, or remotely?

No, I need to setup and take down. It can be some years before I have a semi-permanent location that I do not need to take down after a few days of imaging.

Daniel R. Bisque:
Do you have plans to upgrade to heavier equipment in the near future?

No, I am enjoying the current imaging train with the f/10 2800mm of the EdgeHD 11, and FOV of the ASI1600. I may get a wider FOV OTA sometime, and so it would only be lighter.

Daniel R. Bisque:
The lighter-weight Paramount MYT coupled with Paramount MYT Tripod powered by an EGO battery with the Software Bisque EGO Battery to Paramount Adapter) makes an ideal portable or remote imaging platform.

What your are mentioning is part of my hope for the Myt - something that can handle the payload, be portable, and has accuracy.

Daniel R. Bisque:
The physically heavier Paramount MX+ offers additional carrying capacity, and can be used in both a portable, semi-permanent, or remote platform..

No remote location in the near future. So a bit more detail...

The reason I am considering the Myt is the portability and for automating my imaging sessions;  the hope is a significant improvement over the CGEMDX. The only reason I was asking about the MX+ was out of concern I would be hitting a performance limit of the Myt.

I love imaging at the f/10 2800mm focal length the EdgeHD 11 provides, and even in my LP home, I like working on galaxies. It has been great learning over the past year. To put some of this in context this image NGC7479 is my most recent one. 

 

My current research suggests the Myt may be a perfect fit. Near 90% of my imaging is done at home. Each nightly session is a setup and take down, as I typically cannot get multiple good nights in a row. Not a complaint, just life.

I have been concerned the closer I get to the 50lbs payload the more difficult it would get with the Myt. This has been the experience with the CGEM DX. Although I have been able to get the CGEMDX to +/- 1” on a good night; +/- 2” on a bad night.

I have been imaging with my EdgeHD11 and CGEMDX for a year using Kstars/Ekos via a RPI3, or using Sequence generator Pro via a laptop. Both RPI3 or laptop, whichever I am using, runs the whole imaging session in my backyard. The session is monitored from in the house over a LAN via my Mac/iPad/iPhone. My preference is to use the RPI3 for the whole imaging process. To get enough time, I typical need to setup one night and take-down; then setup/take-down again a week later on the same target, in order to get enough time. I am hoping to get more time for the above.

I am happy with the results, knowing my location and that I am a beginner. With the CGEMDX it is a bit of work, and ideally the Myt can be less work. The above image is from 2 different sessions.

Even though the CGEMDX supports a 50lbs payload, and adding a second 22lbs counter weight has helped smooth out the RA, I am not able to automate the centring of the CGEMDX on a target repeatably using my ASI1600. The closest I can get to automating the centring of CGEMDX on a target is within 3" or 300 pixels. This is not a problem if the target for the night is 100% in one meridian all night, as once I manually centre the target, the session can be left to run all night. If there is a meridian flip involved though it is complicated, and it can take me about 30-40 minutes to centre and resume the session.

My hope for the Myt is to maintain the portablity of the CGEMDX, and automate the imaging session including the meridian flip using the RPI3. 

Other than adding a dew strip for the cameras for the winter, or perhaps to relocate the RPI3 to the OTA, no significant weight difference is planned. Any next purchase would be an astrograph where the OTA would be 1/2 the weight or so, and this is a low priority. I have considered a C14 if I every get a permanent setup; this may not be for 15 years or more though.

Considering the above, a few more questions please:

1. Worst case, if the payload gets to 50lbs or even 55lbs, would the Myt maintain its performance and meet the above expectations?

2. What sort of centring accuracy should I expect with the Myt at f/10 2800mm fl, or will I have the same centring issues?

3. It can take me up to 40 minutes to setup the CGEM DX, from the starting point of opening the tripod and pointing it north, through to the polar alignment and star-alignment. Is the Myt setup time comparable considering I setup and take down? I like the automated t-point i have read about.

4. Is it possible to put the Myt on the CGEMDX tripod, or am I fooling myself and should get the Myt tripod?

5. Considering what I am using above, would it be better to get the MX+ tripod, or is it realistic to stick with the Myt?

6. Considering the what I am doing (RPI3 for imaging, setup take down, and looking for imaging multiple nights) is the Myt still the correct fit?

Thank you so much for your help and consideration.

Stephen

Top 25 Contributor
Posts 2,019
Universal Subscription Licensee

The actual weight you can carry is not only a function of the amount but the length of the tube. I believe the MYT can certainly handle a "few extra pounds" as long as it is distributed correctly. I have an ME and a MYT and have seen 6 in Refractors on a MYT. There is a demo video out there with a MYT carrying a large load that was made by the Bisque's during testing.  Your requirements indicate that almost all your data collection is in the backyard. So portability is a concern but not the main one. The real concern is repeatability of ease of setup.  A little work like putting in some pavers for the tripod legs to rest on will make repeatability easier. The MX tripod has more carrying capability and has the knobs that let you level it even with a load on it. It is possible to get an adapter that will allow the MYT to fit on the MX tripod but as for your other tripod do not know. Software Bisque sells a few different pier adapters that might work. I do not think the MX will  fit on the MYT tripod and there is no adapter 

I do not know your financial situation but a MX tripod maybe a better solution than the MYT tripod. The MX will also provide a lot of extra capability down the road. As for longevity I have an original ME from 2002 that is still working fine. My MYT has been on several expeditions to week long star parties as well as some backyard Ha work with no issues yet. So I would expect either MYT or MX to last for many years. Since the mount will probably last you for a long time, getting the MX now maybe a better solution in the long run. I do not know the resale value of a MYT but the eventual price of upgrading may need to be considered.

Roy

 www.roystarman.com

I am not employed by Software Bisque, but I am a satisfied customer.

Top 25 Contributor
Posts 1,257

I know that weight was a big consideration for me as a portable imager. In fact, I lusted after the original MX for years, but didn't buy one due to how heavy it is to carry around. When the MyT came out I jumped on it and love the thing.

Oh and I run my MyT on an Avalon TPod-130... rock solid.

I've run dual imaging refractors with 50lbs of counterweights on the MyT... pretty much maxed out... and with zero loss in imaging performance. So don't worry about that, and forget about comparing it the CGEM or anything else from China for that matter. I know, I owned a CGEM for three years, blech! Those mass market mounts are nowhere near the performance level of a Paramount. When Bisque says you can run 50lbs of imaging gear, they mean it. The CGEM can barely run 10lbs and still has 30+ arc seconds of PE, wobble and drift issues.

What is important for performance is realizing that the weakest link in the imaging system will be your downfall. You can buy the best mount in the world, but a weak dovetail, floppy mirror, sagging focuser, thumbscrew connectors or cable drag will still bite you.

You need a totally rigid, repeatable, modelable system to get the most out of a premium mount, like a Paramount. SCTs as they are out of the box, don't meet that requirement. So you're going to want to consider how to improve the scope's rigidity before putting it on a high end platform.

Top 10 Contributor
Posts 27,816
Software Bisque Employee

Wes Chilton:
What is important for performance is realizing that the weakest link in the imaging system will be your downfall. You can buy the best mount in the world, but a weak dovetail, floppy mirror, sagging focuser, thumbscrew connectors or cable drag will still bite you.

You need a totally rigid, repeatable, modelable system to get the most out of a premium mount, like a Paramount. SCTs as they are out of the box, don't meet that requirement. So you're going to want to consider how to improve the scope's rigidity before putting it on a high end platform.

I could not agree more.  And, even when every single component meets the above, pinched optics, or other optical aberrations can make you think there's a mount tracking problem when there's not.  A basic understanding of your optical system, camera orientation, tracking rates, image scale (for example) can be a real asset.

Daniel R. Bisque

Software Bisque, Inc.

862 Brickyard Circle

Golden, Colorado 80403-8058

Office Hours: 8 a.m.-5 p.m. Monday-Friday GMT-7:00

Posting Etiquette

Top 25 Contributor
Posts 1,655

I would say that once you add rings to your C11, and you will at some point add rings, you will be over the MyT’s capacity. I think there is an MX+ at the pound with your name on it. 

Top 100 Contributor
Posts 230

The imaging train is, EdgeHD11, LiteCrawler Focuser, ASI OAG, ASI EFW, ASI1600mm-c, asi174 Guide, and spacers. I cannot say that I can yet appreciate the meaning of the rigid optic. I think I get it though. Locking the EdgeHD mirror and using the LiteCrawler made a huge difference. Again too, once all the correct spacers were in place there was another positive difference. 

As to optics, I do have to accept what I have for now. I am assuming if guiding on CGEMDX is +/- 1” when I do not mess up the polar alignment or bump mount (lol, last year I forgot ice melts during day which really threw off the alignment the subsequent night), the guiding will be fine with paramount. 

I do appreciate the Mx+ and it’s additional capacity. The MX+ is heavier than CGEMDX, and the Myt is lighter. In years to come if I get something larger I would deal with it then; if it would happen it would be a dream come true, and with the dream a new Mx+ mount.

I have started to look into the C11 rings; what is their weight? It is not clear what all I would need to connect my OTA to the Myt. It seems I will not hit 50lbs. I will double check the current weight to confirm.

It seems to be finding the personal balance, and you all have made it clear that both mount are amazing. Thank you.

So, assuming I keep the above imaging train, and use SkyX on a RPI3, and setup/takedown routinely in backyard or a one night stand at a dark site, does it make sense to stick with the Myt and the Myt tripod? The mech eng in me likes the Mx tripod, yet if it is not need, then it makes it easier with total cost.

Assuming I keep the above imaging train, and use SkyX on a RPI3, with Myt and Myt tripod, should I expect to be able to have an imaging session handle a meridian flip on it own?

 

Top 25 Contributor
Posts 2,019
Universal Subscription Licensee

I do not know how the CGEMDX did a meridian flip but on a Paramount it simply flips when a slew is commanded to a target that is on the other side of the meridian. Both the MYt and MX can go past the meridian up to 2 hours so in most case it should not be an issue for the system to finish the image and then slew (meridian flip).  Most automation programs like CCDAP, CCDCommander and others keep track of this and when necessary will simply send a slew and it will meridian flip and proceed. The LTI interface will automatically meridian flip and image link to center the object but at this time it will not support guiding. For guiding you will need SKY X Pro and some sort of external automation routine to take care of the meridian flip for you. SKY doesn't care if it is a Linux, RPI3, Mac or Windows as far as the  functionality of  controlling the mount is concerned. The Paramount with a good Tpoint model with a refactor  will normally center the object to within 20  arc seconds after a meridian flip so the close loop slew may not be required. However depending on your setup you may wish to close loop slew to center the object. There are tricks to delay a meridian flip or force an early one but frankly I ahve never needed to use them. See http://www.bisque.com/sc/forums/p/31961/162877.aspx#162877. for a discussion on delaying meridian flips.

 

Roy

 www.roystarman.com

I am not employed by Software Bisque, but I am a satisfied customer.

Top 100 Contributor
Posts 230

Before I forget, I am in Canada... Winters are cold. I do not mind imaging up to -25C or so (-13F). Will this be a concern for the mount? 

SGP and Ekos do meridian flips as you mention. The distance past the meridian is monitored, and once the limit is passed and the image completes, the slew command is issued for the flip. The CGEMDX has been nice to use. My search is spurred as it is in for warranty work now. It seemed once the LiteCrawler focuser was added, the ability for the CGEMDX to centre within 60 arcsecs. disappeared. Now I am lucky to automatically get within 1.5 arc minutes. This does not allow for the repeatability I wish.

The CGEMDX, pending some hoped for software upgrades, may be able to do the centring I wish: this unmanned meridian flip and scheduled slewing I am looking todo. Yet, it is not out of the box. I have no concerns switching to TheSkyX, camera-ad on, and TPoint. Actually I would welcome it; however, I will not subscribed separately to use with the CGEMDX, and will wait for a new mount :)

With all of your help, it is clear to me now that centring will not be an issue for the Myt at the 2800mm fl of my C11 at 0.28 arcsec/pixel. If there are issues found it would be in the quality of the stars due to flex, or such, of the image train. I found the PDF manuals for the Myt and SkyX, so my research continues.

I did weigh the payload again, as you all had me guessing <g>, today it is 45-46lbs. This includes dovetail counterweight, usb hub, dew shield, et. al. The only item I am considering adding is the .7 reducer, another ~3lbs. So it is all under the 50lbs rating of the Myt.

I now understand that the Myt/Mx+/Paramount the weight capacity ratings are true, no half weight rule, and so the Myt will be fine with my setup... this is cool

I am settling on the Myt. The reasons - portable, lighter, matches the system I am using, I do not have upgraditis as long as things work. If you have not guessed, I typically research things to know what i am getting, and then use it thoroughly.

Thank you all again, now the savings continue on for a Myt, and its tripod... Oh, is there a recommended Canadian Retailer, or is it better to purchase direct from Canada?

 

Top 25 Contributor
Posts 1,026
Software Bisque Employee

maudy2u:
I have started to look into the C11 rings; what is their weight?
I just added the weight of all the ring sets into their description on the store since that piece of information was missing! The weight of the C11 rings is 11 pounds.

Sarah Bisque Clawson

Software Bisque, Inc.

862 Brickyard Circle

Golden, Colorado 80403-8058

Top 25 Contributor
Posts 2,019
Universal Subscription Licensee

Glad we can be of help. THe only issue with centering after the flip will be the ability to keep the mirror from flopping. I think you may also need a refocus after a meridian flip on some systems. O think this can be automated in the control programs. The close loop slew is similar in function to the Image link and adjust routines that others use. It will get you to withing several seconds.

Roy

 www.roystarman.com

I am not employed by Software Bisque, but I am a satisfied customer.

Top 100 Contributor
Posts 230

SarahKimberly:
I just added the weight of all the ring sets into their description on the store since that piece of information was missing! The weight of the C11 rings is 11 pounds. 
Ah... Okay, thank you for letting me know.

Understanding Need for Rings: I do not fully appreciate the benefit of the C11 rings, over the current dovetail. I inferred the versa plate will use my current Celestron dovetail as is to mount the EdgeHD C11. The weight of the rings is a bit more than I expected, and now I need to double check...

1. Is it true nothing special is needed to use my current dovetail to connect to the Myt's versa plate? I wish to confirm my readings from the PDF documents.

2. Is there something that can help me appreciate what the C11 rings bring? I infer the rigidity, and yet I lack experience to appreciate it.

3. Are the rings for a permanent setup? In which case, the rings are not in my foreseeable future.

Current plan: Assuming true that the current dovetail can be used as is, no need to jump to rings, then my current payload is at 45.1lbs. The only addition foreseen for some time is the 3lbs reducer ~ 48.1lbs and two 20lbs counter weights (40lbs). Current plan holds and all is good.

Double check plan: Now should the C11 rings be a recommended addition for my setup/takedown session the payload becomes 59.1 lbs ~60lbs... Then two 20lbs counter weights ~ 100lbs.

In the case of adding rings, is it begging for trouble to add the rings and hit a 60lbs payload and the 100lbs limit on the Myt? It is clear the MX+ and its tripod can handle the 100lbs, and the 100bs is the Myt's rating. I have seen the video of the Myt slewing the 150lbs. I understand it is agreed the Myt can handle a few extra pounds - that is a key reason I settled plans on the Myt as my complete package - good hardware, accurate, repeatability and great software. By a few extra pounds though I was not envisioning 11lbs, perhaps 3-4lbs, so I hope to confirm.

I am content with the current kit and would only be going lighter in the foreseeable future. Stepping up to the MX+ and tripod is an additional 5000$. I would rather not invest the additional 5000$. Should there ever be good fortune to go bigger in an observatory then I assume the money must be there to do it and would then get the bigger mounts. Yet, if my plans for the Myt are begging for hurt, then plans need to be switched.

Confirming Current Plan: Assuming I have understood right, no change, is there anything else I would be missing to enjoy the SB world: Myt and its sweet Software Suite :) , Myt tripod, second counter weight, Ego adapter, and perhaps the polemaster adapter?

Please let me know. 

Thank you all!

Cheers!

Stephen

 

PS. Roy, about the mirror flop, it is definitely less with the mirror locks engaged. I missed engaging them one night and saw the SCT mirror flop. You have me curious as I never noticed a pattern around flop and centring. I will test the mirror locks via flipping the meridian and focusing once the CGEM is back - just a quick check to see if one side of the meridian centres better than the other after setup :)

PSS. In researching purchase options, I was told there is no hand controller with a Paramount, and the Versa Plate is an optional item (I want to think they meant the C11 rings as I had asked about weight in parallel to here)? The Myt product page clearly has a hand controller and lists the versa plate as included. Please confirm my understanding is true: versa plate and hand control are included.

Top 10 Contributor
Posts 3,900
Software Bisque Employee
maudy2u:

1. Is it true nothing special is needed to use my current dovetail to connect to the Myt's versa plate? I wish to confirm my readings from the PDF documents.

2. Is there something that can help me appreciate what the C11 rings bring? I infer the rigidity, and yet I lack experience to appreciate it.

3. Are the rings for a permanent setup? In which case, the rings are not in my foreseeable future.

  1. That's correct.
  2. What you're apparently not considering is that the dovetail plate isn't used with the optional rings. This is one reason why the rings reduce flexure, and you can subtract the weight of the dovetail plate from your calculation.
  3. They work well for either portable or permanent configurations.
maudy2u:
…I was told there is no hand controller with a Paramount, and the Versa Plate is an optional item…
Yes, the Versa-Plate and hand controller with joystick are standard, included with the mount. Perhaps someone meant that the hand controller has no go-to capability; it can be used for homing the mount, guiding or moving the mount at a variety of speeds, but go-to slewing requires control from TheSkyX Professional Edition or TheSky for iOS.

Brian S. Rickard
Software Bisque, Inc.

Page 1 of 2 (19 items) 1 2 Next > | RSS

   

© 2019 Software Bisque, Inc. 862 Brickyard Circle, Golden, CO 80403-8058 USA - phone: +1 303 278 4478 fax: +1 303 278 0045
Google+